Some of you mentioned the Philly team that won the NBA Championship in 66/67. That team truly was one of the greatest ever with Wilt, Chet (The Jet) Walker and Luke Jackson at the forward position, Wali Jones and Hal Greer guards, and 6th man Billy Cunningham. Coached by the fantastic Alex Hannum they rolled over the Celtics to stop the Celtics streak at 8 straight Championships. In 1980 this team was voted the greatest team in NBA history.

However, the bias shown in that voting was unreal. The following year 67/68, Russells second as player coach of the Celtics, the Boston Celtics defeated the Philly team four games to three in the playoffs. They then went on to defeat LA again (Ho Hum) for their 9th championship in 10 years. Since the players from the previous year (66/67) were the same ones that played in 67/68, Why isn't the 67/68 Celtic team the Best ever?

IMO, any team with Bill Russell would have beaten any of the MJ teams. The Lakers and the Celtics of the 80's were both great and either one would have beaten MJ's teams. MJ had a distinct advantage of not playing against real good opposition. In addition MJ had the league officials on his side, EX. the Byrun Russell push off that was not called. Obviously MJ took more steps than anyone else in the league and rarely if ever was called. Bird didn't take those steps and neither did Magic. Certainly the players in the 50's and 60's didn't take those kind of steps because 2 steps was traveling back then and it was enforced. Can any of you imagine how out of this world Oscar Robinson would have been if he could have gotten away with the steps MJ and Shaq, and Kobe and Labron and Rondo take now? Oscar was MJ before there was an MJ!

Whether the Laker teams of the 80's, or the Celtics teams of the 80's was the best of all time I really think is a close call. I would not rule out some of Russells teams in the 60's or the Laker Team coached by Celtic Bill Sharmen in the early 70's. I do rule out any team since the Lakers won in 86/87.

My all time favorite team is the 56/57 Boston Celtics who won the 1st NBA title for the Celtics. They were not the best of all time, but they were still fantastic. Obviously I am just slightly biased as I attended Game 7, with my Father and GrandFather, against the St. Louis Hawks in April 57 that went 2 OT's before it ended in a two point victory for the Celtics. Almost went into a third OT. Tommy Heinsohn (Rookie year) was the player of the game for the Celtics. Bob Petit was amazing for St. Louis.

Some of you mentioned the Philly team that won the NBA Championship in 66/67. That team truly was one of the greatest ever with Wilt, Chet (The Jet) Walker and Luke Jackson at the forward position, Wali Jones and Hal Greer guards, and 6th man Billy Cunningham. Coached by the fantastic Alex Hannum they rolled over the Celtics to stop the Celtics streak at 8 straight Championships. In 1980 this team was voted the greatest team in NBA history. However, the bias shown in that voting was unreal. The following year 67/68, Russells second as player coach of the Celtics, the Boston Celtics defeated the Philly team four games to three in the playoffs. They then went on to defeat LA again (Ho Hum) for their 9th championship in 10 years. Since the players from the previous year (66/67) were the same ones that played in 67/68, Why isn't the 67/68 Celtic team the Best ever? IMO, any team with Bill Russell would have beaten any of the MJ teams. The Lakers and the Celtics of the 80's were both great and either one would have beaten MJ's teams. MJ had a distinct advantage of not playing against real good opposition. In addition MJ had the league officials on his side, EX. the Byrun Russell push off that was not called. Obviously MJ took more steps than anyone else in the league and rarely if ever was called. Bird didn't take those steps and neither did Magic. Certainly the players in the 50's and 60's didn't take those kind of steps because 2 steps was traveling back then and it was enforced. Can any of you imagine how out of this world Oscar Robinson would have been if he could have gotten away with the steps MJ and Shaq, and Kobe and Labron and Rondo take now? Oscar was MJ before there was an MJ! Whether the Laker teams of the 80's, or the Celtics teams of the 80's was the best of all time I really think is a close call. I would not rule out some of Russells teams in the 60's or the Laker Team coached by Celtic Bill Sharmen in the early 70's. I do rule out any team since the Lakers won in 86/87. My all time favorite team is the 56/57 Boston Celtics who won the 1st NBA title for the Celtics. They were not the best of all time, but they were still fantastic. Obviously I am just slightly biased as I attended Game 7, with my Father and GrandFather, against the St. Louis Hawks in April 57 that went 2 OT's before it ended in a two point victory for the Celtics. Almost went into a third OT. Tommy Heinsohn (Rookie year) was the player of the game for the Celtics. Bob Petit was amazing for St. Louis.Posted by larry1717

Not sure you should be talking about bias. "Any team with Russell would have beaten any of the MJ teams" ... " MJ had the distinct advantage of not playing against any opposition". Great your a Celtics fans like 90% of the people on here. But your post shows a lack of appreciation , understanding and knowledge of the NBA. First of all if you think the league just started being fixed , rigged , w/e you want to call it. Well that shows you either dont have a clue or are just fooling yourself. Its been in sports forever , every sport , fact! And as for 45 never beat anybody? Again you just dont have a clue. Lakers , Pistons , Magic , Jazz , Supersonics , Knicks , Pacers , Trail Blazers , Heat , Cavs , Suns , Hawks are some of the teams 45 beat while getting to or getting a ring. Are you really trying to say that basketball wasnt at its peak from the late 80's to late 90's. Just put the whole 80's-90's in there as a whole. Way better then 50's , 60's etc. You cant even compare the level of talent , competition , physical skill set with anything before that. It shows that you love the game but your bias or denial w/e you prefer just pours through. MJ didnt get away with anything that any other superstar got or gets now. If anything you should be talking about the league today. Theres absolutely no D at all and the worst fix jobs of the last 30-40 years have been 2002 , 2006 and this year with the Heat.

In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time. : Not sure you should be talking about bias. "Any team with Russell would have beaten any of the MJ teams" ... " MJ had the distinct advantage of not playing against any opposition". Great your a Celtics fans like 90% of the people on here. But your post shows a lack of appreciation , understanding and knowledge of the NBA. First of all if you think the league just started being fixed , rigged , w/e you want to call it. Well that shows you either dont have a clue or are just fooling yourself. Its been in sports forever , every sport , fact! And as for 45 never beat anybody? Again you just dont have a clue. Lakers , Pistons , Magic , Jazz , Supersonics , Knicks , Pacers , Trail Blazers , Heat , Cavs , Suns , Hawks are some of the teams 45 beat while getting to or getting a ring. Are you really trying to say that basketball wasnt at its peak from the late 80's to late 90's. Just put the whole 80's-90's in there as a whole. Way better then 50's , 60's etc. You cant even compare the level of talent , competition , physical skill set with anything before that. It shows that you love the game but your bias or denial w/e you prefer just pours through. MJ didnt get away with anything that any other superstar got or gets now. If anything you should be talking about the league today. Theres absolutely no D at all and the worst fix jobs of the last 30-40 years have been 2002 , 2006 and this year with the Heat.Posted by startrightnow

You made some interesting comments and I will try to reply to a few. Obviously my replies are my opinion and I probably am biased because I believe what I believe. When we are speaking of subjective type analysis, everyone will have their own bias.

1. IMO Bill Russell was the greatest of all time. I have not seen anyone come along since he left basketball that could control a game as well as he could. He is the only player that other teams Consistently stopped moving ahead on a fast break when it was 2, 3 or 4 on 1 and Russell was the one. That is something that I have only seen on a consistent basis with Russell. Unfortunately blocked shot stats were not kept when Russell played because that was a big part of his game every game. Can you name a player now or since Russell retired where blocked shots were a significant part of his game, every game? I can not! Russell controlled the game he was in from the defensive end of the floor, but he also started the famed Celtic fast break by rebounding and getting the ball to the likes of Cousy, Jones, Havlichik etc. Mainly it was Cousy until the Cooz retired. Russell was 6' 9 1/2" tall with very long arms and the best timing instinct of any player I have had the pleasure of watching the past 60 years. He was blessed with the ability to jump at the right time, and he jumped very high. No one has come along with his distinct abilities since he left the game. Now is that Bias? I consider it to be a knowledgeable opinion. You are certainly free to have your own opinion. However, unless you saw Russell play, I doubt that you can understand his true greatness. For instance, if you tried to explain to someone who had never seen MJ play how great he was, they just might have some difficulty visioning it. I can appreciate those, who through no fault of their own never saw Bill Russell play, having a difficult time agreeing with me. It is to be expected. On the other hand, I never actually saw babe ruth play baseball, but I have a strong feeling that he was one of the greatest baseball players of all time, if not the greatest.

2. IMO MJ's greatest opposition was Utah with Stockton and Malone. I do not consider that Utah team to be a great team, yet that team IMO was the main opposition MJ had. The Celtics in the 80's had Philly, Then LA then Detroit to compete with and they all were far superior to Utah of the 90's.

3. Rules and Regualtions: You may think that the officials of the 50's and 60's called games in a similar manner as they do today. I can tell you for sure that if you feel that way you are wrong. Bob Cousy, one of the greatest stars of the 50's, could not take two steps without being called for traveling. Rondo gets a defensive rebound and many times takes 3 or 4 steps before putting the ball on the floor. Call it what you want, but back in the 50's and 60's star power and calls were not what they are now. Not even close! Star power and ridiculous calls done by officials on a routing basis started in the 80's with King David Stern. The Celtics benefitted with Mchale being allowed to take an extra slip step because the league stated it was his patented move. A patented move whereby he moved his pivot foot every time---that is traveling in any basketball game other than the NBA. MJ got away with taking 3, 4 or in at least one case I saw and taped, he took 9 steps and put the ball on the floor just one time. He got the ball at just behind midcourt on the right hand side and ran to the top of the circle and then to the left corner and thyen ran under the basket and layed the ball up with his right hand whi9le the announcer stated, "I have never seen anything like that before" and the home crowd gave MJ a standing ovation. I must agree, I had never seen anything like that before either--9 steps and the ball hit the floor one time.

MJ's push off of Byrun Russell is one of the classic's of all time. Any other player on the Chicago team who might have done that, including Scottie Pipen, the whistle blows and the foul is called and the basket is waived off. In this case MJ is congratulated for hitting the winning and clinching shot, while his defensive opposition player is trying to get up off the court floor after being shoved done by MJ.

I do agree with you that Kobe and James and some other so called super stars of today get the same kind of benefit of official calls. I do not agree that Cousy, Russell, Jerry West, Oscar, Wilt, Bob Petit, John Havlichik, Dave Cowens, Willis Reed etc. etc. etc. ever got that same favorable treatment.

I do agree with you about the recent fix jobs. That is another David Stern Production through his officials. David Stern was determined to increase the popularity of Pro basketball and he has been extremely successful. In so doing he created the Star system. He also meshed some of the Harlem Globetrotter officiating with WWE activities somehow connected to basketball. When you see Rondo thrown to the court, that is part of the WWE connection. I can not wait until Stern retires. He has changed basketball to attract Yippees and thedrinking crowd, not for the benefit of pure basketball fans.

All of the above is MY OPINION! I have been watching pro basketball since the very early 50's.

PS: For those of you who think white players dominated the game in the 60's, you are absolutely wrong. The Celtics started 5 black players in the first half of the 60's. Havlichik was the 6th man. They could all run and run fast. They were not slow footed. In fact, I wonder what player today could keep up with John (white man) Havlichik even if they were running with the ball?

Some of you mentioned the Philly team that won the NBA Championship in 66/67. That team truly was one of the greatest ever with Wilt, Chet (The Jet) Walker and Luke Jackson at the forward position, Wali Jones and Hal Greer guards, and 6th man Billy Cunningham. Coached by the fantastic Alex Hannum they rolled over the Celtics to stop the Celtics streak at 8 straight Championships. In 1980 this team was voted the greatest team in NBA history. However, the bias shown in that voting was unreal. The following year 67/68, Russells second as player coach of the Celtics, the Boston Celtics defeated the Philly team four games to three in the playoffs. They then went on to defeat LA again (Ho Hum) for their 9th championship in 10 years. Since the players from the previous year (66/67) were the same ones that played in 67/68, Why isn't the 67/68 Celtic team the Best ever? IMO, any team with Bill Russell would have beaten any of the MJ teams. The Lakers and the Celtics of the 80's were both great and either one would have beaten MJ's teams. MJ had a distinct advantage of not playing against real good opposition. In addition MJ had the league officials on his side, EX. the Byrun Russell push off that was not called. Obviously MJ took more steps than anyone else in the league and rarely if ever was called. Bird didn't take those steps and neither did Magic. Certainly the players in the 50's and 60's didn't take those kind of steps because 2 steps was traveling back then and it was enforced. Can any of you imagine how out of this world Oscar Robinson would have been if he could have gotten away with the steps MJ and Shaq, and Kobe and Labron and Rondo take now? Oscar was MJ before there was an MJ! Whether the Laker teams of the 80's, or the Celtics teams of the 80's was the best of all time I really think is a close call. I would not rule out some of Russells teams in the 60's or the Laker Team coached by Celtic Bill Sharmen in the early 70's. I do rule out any team since the Lakers won in 86/87. My all time favorite team is the 56/57 Boston Celtics who won the 1st NBA title for the Celtics. They were not the best of all time, but they were still fantastic. Obviously I am just slightly biased as I attended Game 7, with my Father and GrandFather, against the St. Louis Hawks in April 57 that went 2 OT's before it ended in a two point victory for the Celtics. Almost went into a third OT. Tommy Heinsohn (Rookie year) was the player of the game for the Celtics. Bob Petit was amazing for St. Louis.Posted by larry1717

In Response to Re: The Five Greatest NBA teams of all time. : You made some interesting comments and I will try to reply to a few. Obviously my replies are my opinion and I probably am biased because I believe what I believe. When we are speaking of subjective type analysis, everyone will have their own bias. 1. IMO Bill Russell was the greatest of all time. I have not seen anyone come along since he left basketball that could control a game as well as he could. He is the only player that other teams Consistently stopped moving ahead on a fast break when it was 2, 3 or 4 on 1 and Russell was the one. That is something that I have only seen on a consistent basis with Russell. Unfortunately blocked shot stats were not kept when Russell played because that was a big part of his game every game. Can you name a player now or since Russell retired where blocked shots were a significant part of his game, every game? I can not! Russell controlled the game he was in from the defensive end of the floor, but he also started the famed Celtic fast break by rebounding and getting the ball to the likes of Cousy, Jones, Havlichik etc. Mainly it was Cousy until the Cooz retired. Russell was 6' 9 1/2" tall with very long arms and the best timing instinct of any player I have had the pleasure of watching the past 60 years. He was blessed with the ability to jump at the right time, and he jumped very high. No one has come along with his distinct abilities since he left the game. Now is that Bias? I consider it to be a knowledgeable opinion. You are certainly free to have your own opinion. However, unless you saw Russell play, I doubt that you can understand his true greatness. For instance, if you tried to explain to someone who had never seen MJ play how great he was, they just might have some difficulty visioning it. I can appreciate those, who through no fault of their own never saw Bill Russell play, having a difficult time agreeing with me. It is to be expected. On the other hand, I never actually saw babe ruth play baseball, but I have a strong feeling that he was one of the greatest baseball players of all time, if not the greatest. 2. IMO MJ's greatest opposition was Utah with Stockton and Malone. I do not consider that Utah team to be a great team, yet that team IMO was the main opposition MJ had. The Celtics in the 80's had Philly, Then LA then Detroit to compete with and they all were far superior to Utah of the 90's. 3. Rules and Regualtions: You may think that the officials of the 50's and 60's called games in a similar manner as they do today. I can tell you for sure that if you feel that way you are wrong. Bob Cousy, one of the greatest stars of the 50's, could not take two steps without being called for traveling. Rondo gets a defensive rebound and many times takes 3 or 4 steps before putting the ball on the floor. Call it what you want, but back in the 50's and 60's star power and calls were not what they are now. Not even close! Star power and ridiculous calls done by officials on a routing basis started in the 80's with King David Stern. The Celtics benefitted with Mchale being allowed to take an extra slip step because the league stated it was his patented move. A patented move whereby he moved his pivot foot every time---that is traveling in any basketball game other than the NBA. MJ got away with taking 3, 4 or in at least one case I saw and taped, he took 9 steps and put the ball on the floor just one time. He got the ball at just behind midcourt on the right hand side and ran to the top of the circle and then to the left corner and thyen ran under the basket and layed the ball up with his right hand whi9le the announcer stated, "I have never seen anything like that before" and the home crowd gave MJ a standing ovation. I must agree, I had never seen anything like that before either--9 steps and the ball hit the floor one time. MJ's push off of Byrun Russell is one of the classic's of all time. Any other player on the Chicago team who might have done that, including Scottie Pipen, the whistle blows and the foul is called and the basket is waived off. In this case MJ is congratulated for hitting the winning and clinching shot, while his defensive opposition player is trying to get up off the court floor after being shoved done by MJ. I do agree with you that Kobe and James and some other so called super stars of today get the same kind of benefit of official calls. I do not agree that Cousy, Russell, Jerry West, Oscar, Wilt, Bob Petit, John Havlichik, Dave Cowens, Willis Reed etc. etc. etc. ever got that same favorable treatment. I do agree with you about the recent fix jobs. That is another David Stern Production through his officials. David Stern was determined to increase the popularity of Pro basketball and he has been extremely successful. In so doing he created the Star system. He also meshed some of the Harlem Globetrotter officiating with WWE activities somehow connected to basketball. When you see Rondo thrown to the court, that is part of the WWE connection. I can not wait until Stern retires. He has changed basketball to attract Yippees and thedrinking crowd, not for the benefit of pure basketball fans. All of the above is MY OPINION! I have been watching pro basketball since the very early 50's. PS: For those of you who think white players dominated the game in the 60's, you are absolutely wrong. The Celtics started 5 black players in the first half of the 60's. Havlichik was the 6th man. They could all run and run fast. They were not slow footed. In fact, I wonder what player today could keep up with John (white man) Havlichik even if they were running with the ball?Posted by larry1717

Interesting post there Larry. Really enjoyed reading it.

I for one also await the retirement of David Stern. However I feel his successor may well be hand picked by him to continue things as they are.

I'm a baby around here and I still think that Russell is the greatest. I'd like to see an individual today win the NCAA, Olympic and NBA titles like he did in 56/57.

Larry, you and Seems are the two guys that have seen it all and it shows in your posts....great knowledge of the game...you both have my full respect....one thing that bothers me about the younger posters....they don't really put things into proper perspective...I mean, this thing about the Celtics being irrelevant for 21 years after the last title in '86.....they don't seem to realize that Boston continued to be a contender afterwards....from '87 through '93 the Celts averaged 52 wins per year....I believe only the incredible injuries the '87 team suffered (along with the death of Len Bias) kept Boston from winning that year....the next year they lost in the Eastern Conference Finals...and they were in the play-offs the following 5 years....then Reggie Lewis, their best player and an all star died....that, coupled with poor coaching, drafting, management, and ownership put them in a huge tailspin....they did recover to get to the Eastern Conference Finals in '02....but it was the worst time to be a Celtic fan, until Danny brought the Big Three together to win it all (against the Lakers) in '08......and it's also interesting to me that, as of today, the Celtics have won one title in the last 25 years......Laker fans love pointing that out....but in reality, the Lakers went through the same time frame....after winning their last title in Minnesota, the Lakers won one championship in 25 years....from '55 through '79.....one title in 25 years!!!!....funny how that never comes up in their posts....but, of course, 95% of the posters probably don't even know that part of history....ok....enough venting on my part....I defer to the elders on this board!! .....keep educating us oh wise ones....I'll keep reading!

Larry, you and Seems are the two guys that have seen it all and it shows in your posts....great knowledge of the game...you both have my full respect....one thing that bothers me about the younger posters....they don't really put things into proper perspective...I mean, this thing about the Celtics being irrelevant for 21 years after the last title in '86.....they don't seem to realize that Boston continued to be a contender afterwards....from '87 through '93 the Celts averaged 52 wins per year....I believe only the incredible injuries the '87 team suffered (along with the death of Len Bias) kept Boston from winning that year....the next year they lost in the Eastern Conference Finals...and they were in the play-offs the following 5 years....then Reggie Lewis, their best player and an all star died....that, coupled with poor coaching, drafting, management, and ownership put them in a huge tailspin....they did recover to get to the Eastern Conference Finals in '02....but it was the worst time to be a Celtic fan, until Danny brought the Big Three together to win it all (against the Lakers) in '08......and it's also interesting to me that, as of today, the Celtics have won one title in the last 25 years......Laker fans love pointing that out....but in reality, the Lakers went through the same time frame....after winning their last title in Minnesota, the Lakers won one championship in 25 years....from '55 through '79.....one title in 25 years!!!!....funny how that never comes up in their posts....but, of course, 95% of the posters probably don't even know that part of history....ok....enough venting on my part....I defer to the elders on this board!! .....keep educating us oh wise ones....I'll keep reading!Posted by Duke4

Duke---Your post above is right on. I do not think You need any educating as you are very perceptive and knowledgeable. What you wrote above I could not improve on. I wish I could have said it as well as you did.

We need to face it, we have been invaded by some Trolls who claim to be Laker fans. I am not sure that they truly are Laker fans. In any case they are only here to cause problems. Those kind of folks I do not give the time of day to. I only point out back to them what ails them, and I am none to nice.

I do have some experiences from the 50's that I will share with the board as time goes on.

Your first 4 choices I understand and they make some sense even if I do not agree with all of them. The 5th, Knicks of 1970, is IMO a bit out of line. Certainly they were a very popular team and played the game the way you like to see it played. However, they never would have made the finals if Russell had not retired after the 69 Championship. There isn't a Celtics team of the 60's that I would rate below the Knicks of 1970. I also would rate the 84 and 85 Lakers and Celtics teams ahead of the Knicks. I would also rate at least one of the 70's Celtic Championship teams (73/74) led by Dave Cowens and John Havlichik ahead of the Knicks. As I said before, the Knicks played the game the way you love to watch a game being played. They had some great players, but they lacked a bit of height when compared to these other teams. They tried hard for many years, but never could defeat the Celtics until Russell retired.

If the question was what 5 teams you would like to see play the game, I would certainly rate this Knicks team as one of them. I would also include the Rick Barry led Golden State Warriors of 74/75.

I agree with your points, as you are a well educated basketball fan. Appreciate your feedback, and agree that the knicks frontline was a bit thin. As far as swagger goes, that knicks team ranks with anyone and the cohesion was impressive. Interestingly, in his 10 finals teams, John Hollinger had our '08 celts in his top 10 based on margin of victories and the numbers on both sides of the ball. I don't think any team post Jordan deserves to be in the discussion, but I thought it was an interesting choice.

I thought of putting the 77 blazers at #1, which a lot of fans may consider a whimsical choice. If you watch the film, there may not have been a more focused team, and Walton in his prime year may have been the finest teammate at center other than big Bill.

I agree with your points, as you are a well educated basketball fan. Appreciate your feedback, and agree that the knicks frontline was a bit thin. As far as swagger goes, that knicks team ranks with anyone and the cohesion was impressive. Interestingly, in his 10 finals teams, John Hollinger had our '08 celts in his top 10 based on margin of victories and the numbers on both sides of the ball. I don't think any team post Jordan deserves to be in the discussion, but I thought it was an interesting choice. I thought of putting the 77 blazers at #1, which a lot of fans may consider a whimsical choice. If you watch the film, there may not have been a more focused team, and Walton in his prime year may have been the finest teammate at center other than big Bill.Posted by truth-torpedo34

That Blazer team was what you call a perfect example of what team chemistry can do... Walton playing injury free may have been the greatest all around center in history. He has always been one of my favorite players to watch.

As far as top teams based upon stats... well, I throw stats out the window. I really cant stand these "analysts" using their software programs to determine greatness. Like the margin of victory elevates a team to greater status than another, just silly imo. FOr ex, some teams just built to grind out wins, others play high pressure, fast break (UNLV Rebels) ball... stats can always be manipulated to prove whatever you want.

THe 70 Knick team made me sick. I wanted them to lose so bad and with Willis out, thought that would make it a layup. They played great team ball, find the open man... Every starter could shoot the ball from distance except Willis, whose range was foul line...still pretty good. Cazzie off the bench was the Microwave for them. CLydes hands and Barnetts jumper where he kicked his legs back after he elevated..lol I think that team just had it going on for that season, it was one of those things where it all came together... not sure I would consider them on the GOAT list... but they sure did play great ball and Id have appreciated more back then if it wasnt such torture to watch them win. I think they also set the winning streak record that year too

larry, Im with you on John Havlicek.. My dad pointed him out to my when he played at Ohio St with Lucas. As a kid, I used to think his name was Applejack... I also remember someone sayng Bobby Knight was on that team.

Anyway, Hondo is usually overlooked when discussing GOAT forwards... but he was just amazing.. never stopped running, so reliable, had the good shot & bankers. He may have been overlooked standing in Russells shadow but went on the win more titles with Cowens, Silas, Jojo et al after Russ's retirement and was still one, if the the most important players on those teams/

Towards the end of his career, right after the ABA merged into the league, it was always the topic of discussion who was the best forward in the game, Hondo or Dr J...

That lasting memory that players leave you with long after they retire....mine was always Hondo being always reliable, always clutch...

So let me just say that im from Boston , die hard Boston sports fan my whole life. Ill never say a bad thing about Russell , but he's not the greatest of all time. How can one argue that hes the best when he played with dream teams every year? Look at the guys he played with. Sharman , Couz , Tommy , Jones ( both ) , as you probably know i could go on and on. And the competition level was wasnt even close as it was when 45 played. Theres no debating that the competition level during the 50's , 60's , 70's wasnt near what it was in the 80's-90's. You can say your a "knowledgeable" fan but that doesnt make it true lol. I cant believe that you cant name one other player who blocked shots on a consistant basis. Seriously you cant name one guy? Not even going to basketball.ref.com on this one. Just off the top of my head i can name The Dream , Howard , Mutombo , Zo and Bol. All of these guys get ot got paid from blocking shots. And enough off oh you didnt see so and so play. Theres plenty of film on tape of Russell and former greats. Thats one problem you old guys , and i mean no disrespectat all in that , is that we have so much video of these guys on tape. You think i argue Ray Robinson is the greatest fighter of all time bc someone told me to? BC I saw his stats , fights etc. on wiki? No its bc i seen a great deal of his fights. Iv seen him throw 10-12 punches in one second , ive seen the speed , quickness , heart , blood , sweat and tears. Same guys in football argue the same things , we never seen Sayers , the old Packers etc. Great thing about today is that there are great people like Sabol and NFL Flims.

Again i named everyone who MJ beat before. If you dont consider Magic Lakers, Thomas Pistons, Shaq Magic, Miller Pacers, Knicks , Barkley Suns , Clyde Blazers and Malones Jazz worthy opponents than again your showing your lack of basketball knowledge. Im not saying trying to be disrespectful , but i cant take you serious if you dont give someone credit for going 6 for 6 against the mentioned above then your just fooling yourself and nobody else. And ill say it again the competition level was a joke in those days. Look at the St.Louis Hawks would get absolutely run out of the gym against ANY of the teams above. So would the Minne./Los Lakers who had one player above 6'9. Look no further than the 63-64 Warriors , you had Wilt and everyone else. Every single team just mentioned would be fighting for a 4-6th seed in the East during the 90's or West for that matter. Back then the NBA had enough size and physicality to deal with guys like Wilt/Russell. Especially Russell when you yourself point out how small he really is.

'63/'64 Warriors............Wilt Chamberlain at 7-1 and Nate Thumond at 6-11.....both Hall of Fame players.....did you just say the teams of the 1990's had enough size and physicality to deal with these guys....? .....REALLY??

I really dont like reading how soandso couldnt play in todays NBA... ITs pure speculation and so easy to say cause it can never be proved. What is proveable is how they played during their era and what they accomplished..

Ya know, anyone can step up right now and say MJ would be a slightly better then average player if he played today...wouldnt even have won a title... Now how can you argue that? No different than what youre saying about Russell....

Sure MJ beat Magics Lakers, but lets be honest, they were well on the way out and were not their top teams.

THey beat the Jazz, good team...were they great? Was Barkelys one year wonder Suns great? Shaqs Magic never did much else... Its hard to compare era's but I never thought MJ's era had many great teams.. The BUlls almost always had to beat the Knicks in the East...Pat Ewing...who else?

What I have trouble with is anyone discounting Russell after 11 titles, 2 NCAA titles and an Olympic Gold. Thats a resume that cant be touched... and Russell is the only common denominator...

In my book, the only argument is who was the 2nd best player in history... and by player I mean who impacted the game more, who caused his team to win more games & championships... Thats got to be the criteria when asking who's the greatest of all time.

Using your boxing analogy, does anyone ever mention Jerry Quarry as the GOAT?? Think about it, its the boxers that held the title for long stretches that ever get named in the debate.

MJ was great but played against weaker competition than Russell did for his era imo/ Other than ppg & a few stats, theres not much else MJ can compare to Russell favorably

'63/'64 Warriors............Wilt Chamberlain at 7-1 and Nate Thumond at 6-11.....both Hall of Fame players.....did you just say the teams of the 1990's had enough size and physicality to deal with these guys....? .....REALLY??Posted by Duke4

Did you watch any basketball during the 80's-90's? You think the Davis brothers , Oakley , Mason , Shaq , The Dream , David Robinson , Rodman ,Mutombo , Smits ... just to name a few are afraid of Wilt and Nate? And besides the two guys you named who else did they have? The teams i mentioned , the Hawks , Minne/Los Lakers and Warriors would get destroyed. Those players were all used being the best player on the court every night they had no competition to go up against. None of those teams have the guard play to compete against any of the teams i mentioned. And those teams have absolutely no guard play at all! All of the teams i mentioned have 1 , 2 and 3's that would eat those old team alive. Do you want to argue that as well?

And again im not discounting Russell at all. Just pointing out that the St Louis Hawks , Minne/Los Lakers and Warriors just arnt great teams. Who did the Lakers have besides Baylor. Who did the Warriors have beside Wilt? Wilt couldnt even get it dont in his day and there was nobody his size. Your telling me hes going to be better playing against real competition like Dream , Smits , Robinson , Mutombo , 3 headed monster , Ewing , Shaq , Eaton , Bol etc. All of these guys are better than 98% of the guys Wilt played agianst. The teams that i mentioned above are not what i consider great competition.

And again im not discounting Russell at all. Just pointing out that the St Louis Hawks , Minne/Los Lakers and Warriors just arnt great teams. Who did the Lakers have besides Baylor. Who did the Warriors have beside Wilt? Wilt couldnt even get it dont in his day and there was nobody his size. Your telling me hes going to be better playing against real competition like Dream , Smits , Robinson , Mutombo , 3 headed monster , Ewing , Shaq , Eaton , Bol etc. All of these guys are better than 98% of the guys Wilt played agianst. The teams that i mentioned above are not what i consider great competition.Posted by startrightnow

I dont understand the direction your taking this discussion... now its about Wilt?

Anyway, do you really have such a high opinion of Minut Bol? How would Wilt ever deal with him or even Mark Eaton? I think you're really stretching things

the problem with this debate is that some posters think that comparing the generations doesn't also take into account genetic change...today's players are larger....but, if Bill Russell was a 22 year old today, since people today are generally larger beings than those of 50 years ago, it would suggest that he would probably gain an inch or so and also have a larger frame....so let's say Russ is 6-11 and weighs around 240-250.....with today's conditioning programs, the weight room, diet, and supplements, he would be easily ready for today's game.....now, keeping in mind that he would still have the incredible leaping ability and athletic skills, along with his mental toughness, the question becomes....would today's game be ready for him....?

the problem with this debate is that some posters think that comparing the generations doesn't also take into account genetic change...today's players are larger....but, if Bill Russell was a 22 year old today, since people today are generally larger beings than those of 50 years ago, it would suggest that he would probably gain an inch or so and also have a larger frame....so let's say Russ is 6-11 and weighs around 240-250.....with today's conditioning programs, the weight room, diet, and supplements, he would be easily ready for today's game.....now, keeping in mind that he would still have the incredible leaping ability and athletic skills, along with his mental toughness, the question becomes....would today's game be ready for him....? Posted by Duke4

Duke

I thought the issue was about comparing the past as it existed vs the present. Why the need for a makeover? Its like saying that the p-51 fighter of WW2 was equal to the f-16 fighter of the present. Take the p-51 fighter, double its size,sweep back its wings, replace the old piston engine with a jet engine, rip out the old machine guns and cannon,replace with air to air and air to surface misiles, throw in modern radar, and there you have it. The P-51 and the F-16 are equal. Are you suggesting that this is how it should be done? If so ,then remember, that the Mikan era of the early 50's would need to be adjusted to account for the White Genetics of his times vs the Black Genetics of the Russell years on to the present.

Actually Seems, yes that is what I referred to......of course today's athletes are bigger, stronger, faster, etc....the four minute mile was broken long ago, the 100 yard dash, etc....offensive and defensive linemen in the pro's go 300+ lbs.....today's athletes are larger by nature....also they have the weight training, diet, supplements, etc....could Russ have played at 6-10 220...? well, I believe that he would naturally follow the same regimen as today's athletes....so while he might not be taller he would probably put on 20 lbs of muscle....if Russ could play Chamberlain back in the day (remember Wilt was at least 2-3 inches taller and outweighed him by 50 lbs) then yes, I think Russ could play today's game and be a star...of course it is all speculation...my contention has always been that, while todays athletes are better, today's game of professional basketball is a diluted product....a "star driven" league (see the Jordan rules).....they no longer enforce some of the basic rules....that is all I'm saying...